Re: Software Update Testing | QMO - quality.mozilla.org

[Aakash Desai]

I'm sending the past two e-mails to the dev-quality mailing list. This is definitely something that the community would probably like to comment on since they're mostly the ones that will be reading this document :).

As for my 2 cents, docs are meant as a way to provide information on general items of the mozQA community's actions that are done on a regular basis. It might be nice to do these sort of things, but I'd be much happier with an easy to read doc that can be vouched for and answered by any and all mozQA Community Leads.

Thanks,
Aakash

----- Original Message -----
From: "Anthony Hughes" <ahu...@mozilla.com>
To: "Henrik Skupin" <hsk...@mozilla.com>
Cc: "qa Mailing List" <q...@mozilla.org>
Sent: Friday, July 3, 2009 10:13:34 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: Re: Software Update Testing | QMO - quality.mozilla.org

It's a good point that we should discuss. Over the last two years that I have been doing update testing with Mozilla, updating update.status is how we have always done it. I consider Juan to be the resident expert when it comes to update testing, so I'll let him chime in here.

Cheers,

Anthony

----- Original Message -----
From: "Henrik Skupin" <hsk...@mozilla.com>
To: "qa Mailing List" <q...@mozilla.org>
Sent: Friday, July 3, 2009 3:21:42 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: Software Update Testing | QMO - quality.mozilla.org

Hi all,

I have one question to the upcoming update testing doc from Anthony:

https://quality.authstage.mozilla.com/software-update-testing#post_comment

It looks good so far but I wonder how we should mark a partial/complete
update as failed after the download:

> 5. Open update.status in a text editor and change "pending" to "failed"

If that is the way most of us are working we could probably go a step
further. What I do is to modify the .mar file itself by removing the
header information which are the first characters in this file. That
means we can also check if update.status was wrongly set to pending.
Otherwise we cannot catch the case if download failures were happen.
Means we have a wrong crc for the updare.mar file. Normally it should
have been catched but as we know deeper testing is always better.

What do you think about?

Henrik
_______________________________________________
QA mailing list
Q...@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/qa
_______________________________________________
QA mailing list
Q...@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/qa